Joel Dunnington (FAC Chair, UT MD Anderson Cancer
Centre) called the meeting called to order at 1002.

Approval of the minutes:approved with no corrections (revised sent out on email).

UTFAC Executive Council
Minutes--Dunnington:

·Board of Regents:

·Purchase of the Walmart property for UT Pan American

·Passed changes in the ethics and conflict of interest polices
for board members of the UT Investment Management Company (UTIMCO)

·No news re: candidates for Chancellor (have not asked for
any consultation form the UT FAC)

·RFP proposal for faculty satisfaction survey continues to
be worked on. Dunnington will follow
up with Ed
Sharpe (Executive Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs).

·Campus reports should be sent to Terese Verklan (FAC Secretary,
UTHSC-Houston) 7 days prior to the general FAC meeting. Verklan will email
the campus reports to all members 2 days prior to the meeting, along
with the to do List. This will also help keep the verbal
campus reports to 5 minutes.

·Daniel Stewart is the new director of the Employee Group Insurance (EGI).
Gaulden (UT PB)
is a representative on the EGI Advisory Committee. However, the meeting
notices arrive so late, his ability to attend is severely limited. The
issue will be discussed with Mr. Stewart.

·The federal regulation for the New Freedom of Information
law was passed last year. Beth Lynn Maxwell from the Office of General
Counsel (OGC) will discuss the final draft later in the day.

·The Mathematics Department at UT San Antonio continues in
conflict resolution counseling at this time.

·Students at UT Dallas will be developing a web page concerning
evaluation of faculty teaching on their campus. OGC has reportedly said
this was permissible, but the students comments would have to
be anonymous. The web-based critique falls under the 1st
Amendment freedom.

·Assignment to committees have been sent out:

·Academic Affairs: Community College Transfers;
Florida and Illinois Transfer Studies; Academic Integrity; Rights on
the Web; Status of the Women in Academics Study

·UT-Austin: was found not to be totally compliant with SACS
in that SACS questioned the computer literacy and quality of jobs obtained
after graduation with a liberal arts and sciences degree. It is believed
that SACS just wanted to challenge a leading institution to purposively
demonstrate that their students were really prepared. UT-A is now working
to accommodate SACS recommendation.

Shelley Payne (UT-A):SACS has a statement
that the graduate is expected to be computer literate upon graduation.It was argued that many of the courses offered
require the use of computersstudents are expected to take one
of these prior to graduation. By adding a statement of this type to
the general education degree, we should be able to satisfy the SACS
criticism.It is really very similar to the current writing
course requirement. All SACS wants to see is that the graduate has the
basic knowledge to use a computer.

Michael
Moore (UT-Arlington): we have also added an oral
competency, that of speech, in response to the SACS visit. The students
can demonstrate their skill level by taking an existing course that
has presentations or the students may take a formal course. For all
newly admitted students, it must be documented (checked off) that the
student has met this requirement.

Robert
Nelsen(UT-Dallas):
The oral competency is already a requirement in the common corewhy
did SACS want this?

Moore:
I dont know, but we didnt have a speech requirement until
then.

Payne:
SACS wanted us to demonstrate that we had some type of exit examwe
argued that the individual faculty already assesses learning in each
class/degree. They want some kind of assessment tool, along with stating
in the catalog how the assessment will be done. If we can deal with
the computer literacy piece, they may back off on this.

James
Stokes (UT HSC-Tyler): Is the proposal for a super TASK really from
SACS, rather than being independent?

Payne:
No, that was independent.

Nelsen:
The TASK document is circulating around the legislature right now. It
is being discussed that it is a good form of assessment.

Beth Lynn Maxwell (Office of General Counsel)Update
on OMBs Revision to Circular A-110 Regarding Public Access to
Research Data Through the Freedom of Information Act

Maxwell
distributed three handouts: copy of the role; article from the Chronicle
of Higher Education and a list of frequently asked questions.

Rule:Published research data created with federal
money has to be made available to the general public upon request.

Origin: The Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) was reluctant to release information regarding
their studies which prompted Senator Shelby (Alabama) to make this his
mission. It was proposed that the issue be studied for one yearthe
study was never done. Senator Shelby subsequently inserted two sentences
in the Appropriation bill just before it was passed, the bill was not
debated and the OMB was then stuck with the two sentences (the rule).
In response, there were over 12,0000 comments and letters re the new
rule pointing out the numerous problems. It is believed that the rule
is there simply because of the EPA, however, it impacts technological
research, health research, open up propriety business secretes, etc.
The rule did not define what the research activity really iscould
be anything, preliminary data, not necessary peer reviewed, any research
data (NIH has a study on defining this). There is also no guidance on
what type of data was included under this rule (incomplete, not published,
etc.).

The rule
now has definitions. Research data is defined as recorded factual material
accepted in the scientific community necessary to validate research
findings (excludes trade secrets, confidential information, intellectual
property, etc.). Published data is defined as data in a peer reviewed
scientific journal, or if a Federal agency cites the data to support
something.The final rule has been tweaked to include
the definitions. The door is still left open to enable the rule to be
revised within the next 3 years once the initial requests have been
reviewed.

The rule
is now in effect. The first real test has been that of the US Chamber
of Commerce requesting the EPA for its researchthe request was
made November 1999 and the EPA has not yet complied.

Liguori:Does the rule have to be renewed at the end of the year?

Maxwell: It will be renewed every
year.

Jerry Mclarty (UT HSC-Tyler): Large industry
may also be behind thisthe tobacco industry is very interested
in looking at the EPA data. And so was the NRA.

Maxwell: There was a certain web site,
that entered you into a sweepstakes if you said that you were in favor
of the bill (rule) and your vote counted yes! 55% of respondents were
thus in favor of the bill (rule). Please call me if you get a request
of informationrequests are likely to be made to attack certain
regulations in process, like the EPA or some federal regulatory body.

Moore: Will the state be likely
to adopt a similar rule?

Maxwell:No. This goes through the Freedom of Information Actthe people
receiving this information are not trained to evaluate what constitutes
research data. FOI Act has two exemptions commercial business
interests and confidentialitythus, this shouldnt come down
to the State level.If there is any federal money involved, however,
the data needs to be released.

Dunnington:If you have a core grant at your institution, then all of the data
is fair game.

Maxwell:Yes, everything is open. Your data is validated on a regular basis,
the EPA doesnt have to do this.

Betty Travis
(UT-San Antonio):
How long do you have to keep your research data?

Maxwell:3 years after the submission of the final financial report. If the
PI chooses to keep the data for longer, then you will be asked to provide
that information.

Mellick Sykes (UT HSC San Antonio): This
addresses the middle set of data that is not published, but is higher
level than preliminary results.There
have been investigators that have published erroneous conclusionsthis
would allow that someone could look at their data.

Maxwell:But thats not the heart of the rule. In scientific publications,
you do present your data. This rule is not a vehicle to test the credibility
of the science.

Marvin Chasen (UTMDACC): You could question
the results by writing a letter to the editor and then the author can
respond. If this conflict continues, does this put the editor on the
spot to initiate an investigation?

Maxwell: This process could be used
to demand the data that supported the conclusions.FOI Act is not equipped to deal with these types of requests (data,
reimbursement, etc.), so there will need to be much more tweaking of
the rule. There are still many issues that need to be addressed such
as, for example, who will pay for the researcher to comply with this
request? The person requesting the information cant just make
a blanket requestthey must state why they want it, identify the
specific study, identify the specific publication, exactly what data
it is that they want access to, etc. The request to the EPA is actually
still pendingare talking about a shield of secrecythey think
the Shelby amendment is way too broad.

McLarty:Are there restrictions on what can be done with the data once the
person requesting it receives it? For example, can someone else publish
results?

Maxwell: The institution owns the
data. It would really be incredible if that person requesting the information
subsequently publishes after looking at the data.

Ivor Page (UT-Dallas, Past-Chair, UT
FAC): There could be a major discovery that has preliminary work that
is kept very confidential. You may not be able to protect your work
effectively now when you publish preliminary results. The researcher
may not want to say anything until he/she wins the Nobel prize!

Maxwell:Thats a good pointthats why the rule will be evaluated
every 3 yearsto see exactly how the request and the data from
those requests are being used.

Sykes: The scope of this appears
to be so narrow that I dont see it stealing intellectual property.

Maxwell: We are talking more about
the publications. Much of the researchers work is protected (preliminary,
not published, etc.) and it will be decided if it was research or not.
Personal notebooks will never be classified as research. See 2nd
page of frequently asked questionsit defines what is research.

Georgia K. Harper (Attorney, Office of General
Counsel)Confidentiality of Mail and Personal Email, and Who has
the Authority to Publish Information on the World Wide Web?

Privacy
issues are becoming more of an issue due to the increased use of the
world wide web and email systems. Two articles pertain hereemployee
privacy and publishers liability for what is published on line.

Privacy
law is a patch workthere really is no one thing that gives rights.
There is tort law, statutory parts of federal law that protect electronic
communications. The electronic communications privacy act does not really
apply hereit extends the wire tapping law into the electronic
environment. This only protects the information while it is in transit,
however, it doesnt apply to the employer, the owner of the communication
system. In addition, the Freedom of Information Act and Open Records
also work against privacy. In contrast, there is the Family Education
and Right to Privacy Act, along with a constitutional right to privacy
(4th amendmentlimits search and seizure), and rights
to sexual privacy.

These areas
of the law are very difficult to understandit all comes down to
whether you had a reasonable expectation to privacy in that particular
situation. The employers policy sets the stage/groundwork for
this. An employer can decide ahead of time whether what you do in your
office is private or not. Our policy is found in Business Procedure
Memorandum (BPM) 53, which can also be found online. All state agencies
had to adopt a similar policy to be in complianceemphasizes that
the information network is state property and belongs to the state,
and is there for us to do our jobs. Our mission defines what we use
it forwe are here to teach and establish an environment of inquiry.
BPM 53 also sets out when the system owners and operators have the right
to look at what is on the system. Thus, there is not a reasonable expectation
of privacy at the University of Texas (employee privacy policy outlines
5 reasons why you do not). There are some universities who have said
that email is private and will not looked at it.

There has
been related litigation:An
employee sued the employer because the employee sent a message that
was unprofessional to his supervisor. The supervisor subsequently used
the message as a part of a disciplinary action. This action was made
public and the employee was punished. The court dismissed it out of
handit was not reasonable to expect privacy in an emailthe
situation was likened to being at the watercooler. In addition, even
if you did have an expectation of privacy, it was not unreasonable to
share the highly offensive content as the company has an interest in
preventing inappropriate/unprofessional/illegal activity on the emailthis
interest is put before the privacy rights of the individual.

Linda Phillips
(UTMB):
What if the email is labeled highly confidential?

Harper: There was a case involving
Microsoftthe company went into the persons computer directory
and found those files. The court said that the computer was there for
you to do your jobyou have no reasonable expectation of privacy.

Sykes: What if you received a personal
mail at work?

Harper: The US mail has rules that
do not apply to email.

Moore: Unless the mail is marked
personal and confidential it can be opened.

Harper: Yes, once it hits the office
we can open it.The US government
doesnt operate the email system. Getting something out of the
mailbox is like an interception rather than getting it off the web where
it resides, especially after it has already been opened on the server.

Page: If an employer were to systematically
read the facultys email on a regular basis like surveillance,
would the employee have a case?

Harper: There are guidelines in the
4th amendmentunreasonable search and seizure may provide
a framework for the investigation. If an employer suspects wrongdoing
(illegal/unprofessional, etc), the faculty can be investigated. The
emails may be the evidence you need. I dont know if you know but
you can enter a persons name at Deja News and get a list of every
message they have ever submitted to Deja News! This is legitimate. On
the other hand, if there is a malicious reason to do this, that doesnt
fit in with the guidelines of the 4th amendment or the exemptions
with BMP 53 when we reserve the right to look at what is going on on
a persons computer.

James Turley
(UT-Houston HSC): There may
be problems when Health Information Protection Act (HIPA) is used.

Harper: HIPA requires us to keep
certain things confidentialis it private from the public or from
ourselves? There are 2 laws that seem to conflict, federal law always
trumps state lawBMP 53 would be trumped by HIPA. This would be
sorted out when the request was made for the information

Nelsen:When does the individual have to be notified that searches of their
email are being done?

Harper: Notification is not a part
of any of the laws.

Nelsen: Is there a retention date
on how long the employee can keep the information on file?

Harper: Document retention schedules
guide thisbut this only applies to the original. A copy can be
kept forever.

David Farquhar
(MDACC):
Our chief information officer says that all email is archived. They
can look into it anytime they want.

Harper: This is true, but there are
some important distinctions. For example, preparing for disasterwe
have a rolling back up of everything on the system. Also we have to
send to the state archives, all kinds of stuffthere is some sort
of record that goes back for long time, but to what extent it is accessible,
with respect to document retention schedules, is unclear.

RalphLiguori (UT-El Paso): If I do state business on my home computer,
does that open the home computer to search?

Harper: That is possible, but with
limitations. If you didnt take the original file home, we cant
insist on the copythe same is true in the electronic environment.

Liguori: An airline went after an
employee who was supporting a sick outthey seized his records
for this.

Harper: They needed to have probable
cause to do this. It appears to be work related so they would need to
have a reasonable basis for going after his home computer records.

James Stokes
(UT-Tyler HSC):
Does an individual have any right to encrypt files?

Harper: That is extremely controversial.
The individual could be compelled to de-encrypt. Because we are state
employees, we cant use encryption to circumvent the open records
act. It also runs into things like HIPA where we do have to encryptbut
this is not subject to the open records act (30 exemptions).

Stokes: Lets say that an employer
is keeping email without cause and we are not notifiedif we are
to insist that anything sent needs to be encrypted, it could prevent
the employer from looking without having the key.

Harper: But if someone invokes the
open records act, then we would not be in compliance and the person
in charge would be liable for not being able to do de-encrypt the filethe
institution would be in violation of federal law. There is a policy
in the works prohibiting encryption unless the content is exempted.
The problem is that you dont really know what is exemptthus
there is a default to the thought that everything is subject to open
records. Also keep in mind that BMP 53 does not permit curious surveillancepeople
cant just look at email.

Stokes: The word audit
is pretty broad.

Harper: If this activity is occurring,
bring it to the attention of the Ethics officer at your institution.

The K-16
committee was established by the System composed of people from the
System. The committee has been meeting since last summer. The problem
identified is, that for the State of Texas we needed to produce 20,000
more bachelor degree students per year for the next 10 years. UT-Austin
produces less than 20,000 bachelor degree students per year. If this
goal cannot be met, it is forecasted that we will have an unskilled,
uneducated population that can not compete economically or work effectively
in business/economic endeavors. Economic trends project that household
incomes would decreaseand increases in poverty would be seen.
Another issue is that our drop out rates are higher in every grade level
when compared to the national averagethis also needs to be addressed.

The problems
lie in a number of areas: by the time the students reach 3rd
grade, they are behind in their readingcant get them back
up to speed after this. It has been shown that if reading lags at 5th
grade it will always be a problem.

2nd problemdropout rate at algebra 1, which
is needed for entry to Universitycant support technological
career/advanced learning. Reading and mathematics skills lag and the
student can never make it to college. Mathematics and reading levels
tend to be poor if the student takes a lot of vocational classes.

There is a major discrepancy between economic groups and
ethnicity. Minority families and children do have the same aspirations
for economic security as Anglos. On examination, there is only a very
small proportion of ethnicities represented in college/university. Poor
school districts suffer from inadequate supplies, equipment and poorer
qualified teachers. This lack of resources has devastating effects on
the education. Three inadequate teachers in a row dooms the student
to failure. There is a large proportion of teachers who are not certified
to teach the content they are providing. A students score of As
in the substandard school system tend to translate into Cs at
the better schoolsare about 4 grade levels behind their counterparts
in the better districts.

We must do more than improve retention without dropping
standards. Money is very significant indicator of successwill
take a lot of money and brave legislation to close the ethnic gap.

How to use U.T. System to assist in solving the problem,
not just for Texas, but for the nation:

·PowerPoint presentation at a Board of Regents meeting introduced
them to the importance of this issue.

·Texas has four million students and 1,042 school districts.
The State Board of Education and the legislature has different rules
under which they operate. Higher education has 800,000 students in 6
university systems and 50 community college districts. This adds up
to about 500-600 board members thus involved with the governance of
education. The State of Georgia has one Board of Regents that is responsible
for both the universities and the community colleges. The Challenge:
who speaks for higher education, and what is the best means to accomplish
the goal given the amount of autonomous agencies involved. The Coordinating
Board is supposed to be orchestrating things, but it is acting much
more like a regulatory agency. This is the collision of the two worlds
in Texas.

·We want to reach the national average each year: 17,000 more
associate degrees and 20,000 more bachelor degrees to achieve the national
average. There will have to be a focus on the lower socioeconomic class
to make the gains. The U.T. Board of Regents has given strong support
from their Academic Affairs committee to do this.

·U. T. components: All components are involved in the project
to varying degrees. For example, the El Paso collaborative for academic
excellence includes the community college and the three largest school
districts in the area. The Uteach program at UT-Austin is nationally
recognized.

·U. T. System: The office of Academic Affairs is trying to
involve itself in programmatic activities instead of regulatory ones.

·The U. T. System K-16 Leadership Council has representatives
from all components.

·The U. T. System K-16 seminar was held January 30-31/00. Participants
included community colleges, academic presidents, five community college
presidents, superintendents, Jim Nelsen, and Charles Miller (Chair of
the Academic Affairs Committee of the Board of Regents).

·Have developed an agenda for long term collaboration that
includes an advanced placement program, mathematics in grades 8-13:
the Algebra I Project to develop successful qualified teachers), UT-H
Reading K-3: Professional development initiative;

·Beyond U.T. System:

·The Chief Academic Officers of the 6 University systems meet
monthly for discussions;

·Texas Association of Community Colleges and the U. T. System
superintendents advisory group created;

·Texas school alliance includes both the largest and the smallest
school districts to improve the number of students coming out of public
schools; the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board; State Board
of Education Certification; Texas Business and Education Coalition (TBEC);
Education Trust Initiative. The guiding principles in the Initiative:
Accountabilityfocus on student achievement as key outcome measure;
Equity close the achievement gap between ethnicities; need for
change and improvementbuild on public school reform movement;
data-driven actions; value of collaboration; sustained effort.

Nelsen:How is this funded?The
Chair of the Appropriations Committee says there is no money for this.

Sharpe: Currently there are discussions
looking into a legislative approach for this. We are also looking into
federal level and private sources.

Craven: What is the State Board of
Educator Certification?

Sharpe: It used to be part of TPA.
It develops the test that teachers must pass to be certified to teach
in public schools.

Craven: If teachers then dont
know how to teach Math and Science, what does that mean about the State
board of educator certification? They really are not ensuring that the
teachers are competent.

Sharpe: This is more demand for teachers
than is supplied. Thus they are not all certified, and we know that
some of them are not qualified.There
is nothing more important than getting able teachers in the classroom.

Corbett Gaulden
(UT-Permian Basin): Senator Bivins says we want more people to go to community colleges
for the first 2 years and you say that we need 20,000 more bachelor
degrees per year. Someone needs to educate the legislature about the
problem/issues.

Sharpe: Those figures are based on
the national average. We need to work with the legislature to determine
how to best meet the needs. There are some very good things going on
in some of the community colleges hereneed to work with them to
turn out the best graduate.

Moore: Is there any momentum to
creating a single board that will cover both universities and the community
colleges?

Sharpe: I dont think
this is getting serious attention. It would be too much responsibility.

Moore: Accountability of the objectivesand the TEAF proposal is circulating. Do you think that this
will be tied together?

Sharpe: I dont think that proposal
has gained any momentum.

Stokes: What is the drive for the
numbers related to the needed graduates coming from?

Sharpe: The view is an economic oneif
we dont produce a broad range of people ready for the workforce,
we will be in economic crisis.

Dunnington: How is big business supporting
the education? They want good deals and dont want to pay taxes
for a period of time. In my area, the kids are not tested until they
fail 2 grades. If the school finds out they have learning disabilities,
the school district then has to take care of themmeaning Special
Education. The school district takes a long time to determine if and
when the child has problems. This is not helping the situation.

Sharpe: Remedial work that needs
to follow the problem is not occurring like it should. We may see something
addressing this at the legislative level soon.

Ross Sherman
(UT-Tyler):
The proposal to establish literacy centers at all UT components was
not carried in the legislature. Where is this now?

Sharpe: The proposal did not get
into the higher education coalition that went forward. We are taking
a broader view and including the community colleges now. We are going
to try to put together a legislative package to go forth.

CAMPUSREPORTS

University of Texas at ArlingtonMichael Moore

·The Faculty Senate
has adopted and/or finalized the following policies:

-Family Leave
Policy - to create consistency across campus and expand coverage.President Witt as agreed to the policy.

-Privacy Policy
- Requires that employees be notified that most means of communication
are not private.Also requires
the president be the only one to order any monitoring.

-Post Tenure
Review - Added section for those who have joint appointments.Also now requires that the administration notify
faculty members when the process has been completed.

-By-laws have
been amended to require that the Chair of the Senate be a current member
of the Senate or a past member.

·Enrollment
is up 5 percent for the Spring.Officials
are crediting much of the gain to Winter session and to distance education.

-Wintersession
and Maymester raise potential difficulties related to faculty salaries.These courses are capped at $3500
for most faculty.However, summer
courses are paid at a rate of one-tenth of the nine month rate.University officials have indicated that they would like to raise
the rates, however, the recent announcement for Wintersession 2000 show
no movement.

·President Witt
announced that faculty and staff would be eligible for 4% raises based
on merit.

·Some bad news.The university learned that the bricks on nursing and business
buildings are literally falling off and will need to be replaced to
the tune of $12.5 million.This was money that we had hoped to use for new construction.

·Administrative
Departure.Our former Dean of
Engineering who had been named a vice-president in charge of the Riverbend
Campus has left the university to become a dean of Engineering in Florida.

·The university
has taken the plunge in major media advertising with television spots
on the local NBC station.The
advertisements air during the Today Show, Jay Leno and Saturday Night
Live.The first spot focuses
on distance education and future ones will focus on Maymester, Riverbend
Campus, and other aspects of UTA.The
early reports are that ads are generating more inquires into the university.

How do you compensate your faculty in special
sessions? 1/10 of their rate in the summer. Administration wants
to cap the compensation at $3500/course irregardless of the faculty
members salary.

Senior faculty are finding
it difficult to continue in light of being Medicare eligible. Physicians
do not want to see them.How
are the other campuses handling this?

Shelley Payne
(UT-A):You have paid family leave?

Moore: Yes, the policy is posted on our web page.

The University of Texas at Austin--Martha Hilley

·Active legislation
has not been prevalent this academic year.To date the Faculty Council has acted on seven formal legislative
reports.All may be found on
the Faculty Council web page http://www.utexas.edu/faculty/council/.A quick survey of legislative action includes:

·Recommendation from Rules Committee on U.T System Faculty Advisory Council Representatives
[The Chair and the Past Chair shall represent U.T. Austin on the U.T.
System Faculty Advisory Council.]Approved by the Faculty Council on September 20, 1999.Approved by General Faculty October 12, 1999,
and transmitted to President on October 13, 1999. Approved by President
December 22, 1999.

·Recommendation from Rules Committee on Faculty Council Executive Committee[The Executive Committee of the Faculty Council
(a standing committee of the Faculty Council). a.Composition: The Chair, and
Chair Elect, and Past Chair of the Faculty Council; the Secretary of
the Faculty Council; one Faculty Council member (elected by the voting
members of the Faculty Council) from each of the following standing
committees: Faculty Advisory Committee on Budgets, Educational Policy
Committee, and Faculty Welfare Committee; and the Chair (or the Chair
Elect in the absence of the Chair) of the Graduate Assembly.]

Approved by the Faculty Council on September 20, 1999.Approved by General Faculty October 12, 1999, and transmitted
to President on October 13, 1999.

Approved by President December 22, 1999.

·Recommendation from Educational Policy Committee on Changes in Policies Concerning
Grades Awarded with Credit by Examination [1.That the University of
Texas at Austin continue to award credit by examination either with
letter

grades or with the symbol CR but that letter grades
for credit by examination not be counted in a student's UT Austin grade
point average.2.That the catalog
and other official publications of UT Austin be amended to reflect this
change in

policies.]Approved
by the Faculty Council on November 15, 1999. Transmitted to President
November 16, 1999.

·Report from the Faculty Council ad hoc Committee on Course Instructor
Surveys Evaluating
Teaching Effectiveness and Excellence. Approved by the Faculty Council
on November 15, 1999. Transmitted to President November 16, 1999.

·Report from the Educational Policy Committee on changes in the Basic Education
Requirement.Calls for the addition
of a statement regarding basic use of computers as well as the definition
and assessment of student computer competency.Approved by the Faculty Council on March 20,
2000.

·Report from the Committee on Committees concerning the creation of
a standing faculty committee on academics and athletics.Defeated by the Faculty Council on March 20,
2000.

·Report from the Committee of Counsel on Academic Freedom and Responsibility
on the mid-probationary review policy.Recommendation was amended to proceed no later than the
fourth probationary year and be completed in the same semester as it
was started.The full text is available at the Faculty Council
web site.Approved by the Faculty
Council on March 20, 2000.

·Major issues
other than legislation have included:

1)Cancellation
of the Kissinger Speech

2)Reorganization
of the upper administration

·The proposed
reorganization will allow President Faulkner more

time to focus more global issues, including the outside community.

Dr. Faulkners plan calls for ten (10) vice presidents instead
of the

current seven (7).Duties
of some of the current vice presidents will

change under the new plan.

·There will
be a new office of campus services (portfolio will include human resources,
facilities, police, utilities, parking, environmental health and safety).
An office of information technology will be formed as well as an office
of public affairs.

Travis: Was the athletic committee not formed?

Payne: A large report was just completed that suggested changes for the athletic
committee that should be addressed by the President first. Thats
why we didnt go forward with it.

The University
of Texas at BrownsvilleTerry Jay Phillips

1.Enrollment
Goal  20,000 in 2010: The administration has set this as a goal.At the general faculty meeting in January,
a resolution was passed which stated that the faculty could only support
this goal if there were the proper resources available.The faculty feels that the institution is already at the limit of
the services it can provide without major new resources in the way of
space, new faculty, new support staff, etc. and to propose a goal of
such huge enrollment increases (more than doubling in ten years) without
proper consideration of the resource implications would be imprudent.There was a retreat of the VPs held in late February, to
determine the resources needed to reach this enrollment goal.

2.An assessment
plan for general education curriculum is being formulated. The various
academic departments that administer courses under the general education
core were assigned the task of devising the methods of assessment of
each individual course to determine how the various Competencies
and Perspectives, designated by the THECB are being met
in each course.

3.The current
Provost has announced that he will be stepping down.He has indicated that he will serve until a
replacement can be found.The
Provost told the Deans Council that some of the reasons for his
decision dealt with frustration in relation to the lack of resources
to hire new faculty and increase current faculty salaries.

The University
of Texas at DallasRobert Nelsen

*Enrollments
are going through the roofup 11% this spring.How much in the fall?8
to 10% overall, maybe 12% or more. Actual acceptances are up 30% from
this time last year. We have no place to put any of these people. No
new dorms will be built until 2002.Portable classrooms have been ordered.

*The
odious code of conduct that I kept warning about has become "compliance
training." We are currently in the middle of (in my opinion) a
major catastrophe. The access to media web training module is a joke,
absolutely misleading, and an embarrassment to the System and to the
Board of Regents. I asked our President to take down the web site (as
was done in El Paso); he refused in spite of my sincere and adamant
protestations. The Senate, therefore, passed a resolution
stating that the faculty considered all of the modules as the view of
the administration only, that taking any of the modules did not constitute
an agreement to comply with the administrations views, and that
faculty retain their rights to speak and act according to normal academic
and legal standards as the faculty understand them.More to come. This issue is clearly on its way to the courts. On
our end, we are rewriting the access to media site, but that site is
only one of the myriad of legal and ethical problems that the Systems
policy muddies and fails to address.

*The funding
of TA's has come to a headthe TAs were about to go on strike.
The administration has offered a proposal ($1000, $500 tuition reimbursement,
annual raises on the basis of the annual percentage offered to faculty,
etc.). The TAs have said yes ..The Deans are unhappy because each school will have to cut its
budget by 2.5% to pay for the raises. The raises still leave the teaching
assistants $500 dollars below what UTD considers (in published form)
the minimal subsistence level of the graduate students to be.

*If
the administration changes the grades of any of our students (they have
always been able to do this), the faculty will at least be notified
from here on out.

*UTD
has been given the right to write a policy on non-discrimination on
the basis of "sexual orientation." The Senate tried to do
this by just adding the words to the catalogue, but failed. The actual
policy to be put in handbooks, etc., will work just as well.

*The
Senate added wording to the catalogue to make it clear that the catalogue
is not a contract and that faculty cannot be sued on the basis of changes
in the catalogue.

*
The System's lawyers in Austin have, according to the administrations
opinion, given the students permission to put up anonymous pages (without
censorship or limits regarding language, tone, content, or number) for
open comments about professors.These
pages will appear on the UTD web site and will therefore be supported
by UTD (and System) money.The
debate on campus is, to say the least, rancorous.Next month the faculty will be considering a motion to be sent
to the President asking him to refuse to use University funds to support
such a site.

Payne: With respect to the compliance
documentwe have no training piece, it is just expected that you
will be in compliance with the relevant state laws.

Farquhar: We had an open forum for
faculty that resulted in a fiasco. Although it is anonymous, the email
can always be traced, and when that was made known, the amount of inflammatory
remarks decreased greatly.

The University of Texas 
Pan American--Sue G. Mottinger

1.Administration
Evaluation:The UTPA Faculty
Senate is conducting an evaluation by

the faculty of the President, Provost/VPAA, Deans,
and the Director of the Library.Opinions
based upon a Likert scale will be reported to the Faculty Senate and
shared with each administrator. The Chair of the Faculty Senate will
share written comments with the appropriate administrator.

2.Dean Searches:There are two dean searches occurring:Dean of the College of

Business Administration, and Dean of the College of
Social & Behavioral Sciences.Each
search should be completed before the end of the spring semester.

3.Curriculum:The UTPA faculty passed a referendum for a
51-advanced hour

minimum requirement for all degree programs at the
university. A core curriculum oversight committee that includes faculty
and administrators has been established.

school compensation and overload compensation for faculty.
The report, including recommendations, was submitted to the President.
At this time, discussions and negotiations are occurring with the President
and Faculty Senate.

5.President &
Faculty Senate:By invitation,
the President of UTPA addressed the

Faculty Senate at its March meeting.Legislative issues and faculty salary are on
the agenda.

constructions are progressing.A groundbreaking ceremony will take place in
the spring for the new on campus, apartment style, residence housing.

7.Department
Chair Compensation: The Faculty Senate is conducting a study of

department chair summer school compensation.
This has caused additional information pertaining to overall department
chair compensation to be included. The final report and recommendations
will be presented to the Faculty Senate and Council of Deans later in
the spring.

8.Faculty Workload
Policy: The Faculty Senate approved the policy in October and

subsequently approved by the Council of Deans. After
discussions with the President, agreements were reached and the proposed
changes forwarded to the UT System Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs.

registration, that is, standing in lines. The enrollment
figures for the spring semester increased 1.2% Student Credit Hours
and 1.84% head count.

10.English Department:
Placed in receivership, that is, a department chair from
another department is serving as department chair ad interim for English.

Travis:: Were the committee and the bylaws disbanded?

Ken Buckman (UT-PanAm): Yes. They disbanded the internal
search and appointed another chair ad interim.

The University of Texas At
SanAntonio-- James C Schneider

Reaccredidation

UTSA
has its site visit on April 24-27.The reports are going out to the site team and the last details
of the visit are being arranged. In the period leading up to the visit
all units on campus are going to be visited by the representatives of
the self-study team to help them anticipate what they are likely to
encounter during the visit. Aside from an uneven record of assessment,
we hope that UTSA is in fairly good shape.

Physical Facilities

Work
is continuing on the third building of the Downtown campus.We received news of additional funding in excess
of $83 million for new facilities and the upgrading of existing buildings.
This will allow a new 240,000 square foot academic building at the 1604
campus, expansion of the library, and various other improvements. Taken
together, this expansion will go far toward alleviating the chronic
shortage of space that has characterized the University over most of
its history.

Restructuring

This
is perhaps the liveliest issue involving faculty at the moment. A committee
of faculty prepared, and the president and the provost have endorsed,
a general proposal to overhaul the academic structure of UTSA. This
features a shift from our current divisional structure toward more traditional
departmental groupings, in most cases. It also involves a reorganization
of the college structure. We currently have fourBusiness, Fine
Arts and Humanities, Sciences and Engineering, and Social and Behavioral
Sciences. Already proposed are new colleges in Engineering and Education,
along with a School of Architecture. Issues yet to be resolved involve
the creation of a programmatic presence at the Downtown Campus and where
in the overall structure to house the remaining programs in Social and
BehavioralSciences.

Grievance

The
president has endorsed the grievance procedure recommended by the Faculty
Senate and the document is currently at System. We may finally have
this resolved after many years.

Womens Issues

The Senate received a partial
response to a Report on Issues of Concern to Women that it had forwarded
to then-President Kirkpatrick last Spring. The report was prepared by
the Associate Vice President for Faculty Affairs and focused on the
under-representation of women in leadership positions at UTSA. In addition
to calling for the formation of a presidential committee to study matters
further, the report indicated that it was the administrations
intention to promote inclusion of women in a new internship program
to help develop future leaders at the University.

Mathematics and Statistics

The Senate discussed matters at its
last meeting, and received documents from the provost concerning the
conflict resolution process and from a faculty member about allegations
made against him. The Senate resolved to ask the Academic Freedom and
Tenure Committee to explore ways in which units with internal problems
might be aided in resolving them. The Math issue continues and there
have been administrative errors (like the web page) that have not assisted
in bringing about a resolution. The conflict resolution process has
been interrupted by a grievance filed against it.

Farquhar:
Was the grievance policy yours or the generic one?

Travis: A little bit of both, but we had some unique characteristics. Ed, do
you know where it is?

the restructuring of senate and
university committees. The proposal would basically

organize most university committees
under the current senate committee structure. Chairs of the senate committees
would remain senior senators with membership comprised of the chairs
of the aligned university committees. The principal rationale is to
afford the faculty a more universal and centralized representation in
the proposal and review of university policies and procedures. The proposal
is under review by the president.

2.The senate has assumed a major
role in the review and revision of the proposed New

Millennium
Vision
strategic plan. After the release of the proposed plan in December,

the senate sponsored an on-line
survey and discussion list database to gain input from

the faculty. An open forum discussion
was also held last month. Several issues were identified as a result
of these initiatives. Consequently, the proposed plan is currently being
revised by a small group committee with the senate president and two
past-presidents serving as members.

6.The Academic
Affairs committee voted unanimously to withdraw its previous recommendation
regarding the proposed resolution to allow faculty to administratively
drop students for excess absences. New federal rules may shift the responsibility
from the student to the university for paying back student loan money
if the student drops below 12 credit hours before the semester of enrollment
is at least 60% completed.

What
do the other campuses do about this?

7.The senate unanimously approved
and President Mabry accepted a recommendation designating the inclusion
of a statement in the Handbook
of Operating Procedures that established senate oversight over any
additions or revisions to the HOP involving faculty.

8.The senate has hosted guest presentations
at each of the senate meetings this year. These presentations have included:
representatives from the bookstore, the SACS steering committee chair,
the interim director of the Longview University Center, enrollment management
dean, strategic planning facilitator, the VPBA, development office and
student affairs.

1.
The SACS visiting team was on campus March 6-9 and provided a series
of recommendations and suggestions.

2.Construction
is nearing completion on the Longview Higher Education Center; program/course
offerings and faculty assignments are being formulated for Fall 2000.
A major gift in Palestine completed the purchase of the remodeled instructional
facilities.

3.Preliminary
architectural specifications for a proposed (and privately endowed)
bell tower have been developed. Approximately one-half of the cost for
a proposed Health and Kineseology building has been secured.

4.Fall enrollment:
up slightly in total number of students, but down slightly in semester
credit hours. Spring 2000 enrollment flat.

In
his remarks to university donors at the annual Presidents Dinner,
President Mabry emphasized the need for scholarships, professorships,
and excellence funds.

University of Texas Permian BasinCorbett
Gaulden

P.T.R.:

Some procedural
delays were encountered in getting our second round of PTR underway.
Only two persons university-wide were evaluated this year. Our small
size, and two promotion attempts are the reasons for the very small
pool of evaluatees this year. The process has been completed. The committee
has finished with its work. The deans of the affected faculty members
have also completed their work. We are finished with the second round
of PTR.

SACS:

The SACS campus
visit was conducted February 14-17, 2000. The visitation committee came
and went with very little criticism of the campus. The committee reported
out 21 recommendations and 11 suggestions.

ADMINISTRATOR EVALUATIONS:

The fifth (or
sixth) round of administrator evaluations is now underway. The faculty
members involved in this year's round of evaluations have all completed
the questionnaires. Those questionnaires are now in the hands of the
Senate committee charged with oversight of the process. Compilation
of the data will take place next week. In our procedure, the direct
superior of the administrator being evaluated is charged with analyzing
the results of the process after compilation. That administrator, then,
writes a summary report to be distributed to the faculty whose administrator
was evaluated. The process should be completed in April.

PRESIDENTIAL SEARCH:

President Charles
Sorber announced in February of this year his resignation effective
May 31, 2001. Vice Chancellor Sharpe was on campus on March 22, 2000
to discuss with various affected bodies the procedures to be used for
selection/election of the membership of the presidential search committee.
At the time of the preparation of these notes, the outcome of those
discussions was not known. An oral report may be available on March
23 at the FAC meeting.

INSTIUTIONAL COMPLIANCE:

The VP for Business Affairs has appointed
a faculty member to the Institutional Compliance Committee. The Compliance
officer is taking a low key position. This appears to be a non-issue
on the faculty.

OTHER:

The
President is considering a 3% salary raise next year.

Travis: Do the faculty who are involved
with the upward evaluation process receive the results of their reviews?

Gaulden: They get a summary of the results
along with the supervisors interpretation of the results.

Travis:Is your tenure with the system
or with the individual component?

Dunnington: We will check with Regents
Rules to determine if there is a rule with this.

Campus
Report for UTMB, GalvestonLinda Phillips

1.
UTMB, Galveston has started its budgetary hearings for this coming fiscal
year 2000-2001. We are anticipating a 1.4% cut across the board.

2.
The Faculty Senate has embarked upon several meetings seeking information
regarding restructuring and other activities on campus. This is in an
attempt to determine what efforts are present on campus and inform the
individual Senators.

3.
The Senators are tracking the progress of the Development Program that
we have endorsed. Little activity has been detected and we are taking
this to upper echelons on our campus.

4.
Attached are the forms used for upward evaluation. On our campus, this
occurs at the Chair level and below. The Deans have exempted themselves.
Currently, it is on a voluntary basis.

Hilley:
How can the deans opt out?

Phillips:
I will clarify this, since we do have forms for this. No one above the
deans is evaluated either.

5.
The Faculty Satisfaction Survey which is a joint effort with the Core
Committee for Women is currently at the printer and should be dispersed
within the next several weeks. We have requested a bid for analysis
of this data. In addition, the Core Committee for Women has embarked
upon a salary equity study which will begin in the School of Medicine
and will continue across the entire campus.

The University of Texas Health Science
Center-San AntonioCheryl Staats

University Level

·In February,
Dr. John Howe announced that he will step down as President of The UTHSCSA
January 2001. A search committee for the position is being convened.

·The proposal
for changes in faculty governance is an ongoing issue.Alternate proposals to the establishment of
a Faculty Senate are being circulated and discussed.A vote is pending.

The
Chairs of the Faculty Assemblies submitted names for the selection committeeThe
Board of Regents will select 3 names.

Dunnington: Sanchez was
not happy with the make-up of the committeeno Hispanic representation,
although women were represented. He charged racism.

Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences

·A search committee
has been formed for the Deans position in the Graduate School
of Biomedical Sciences.

·A Graduate
Faculty Assembly Committee is in the process of review and revision
of the Schools By-Laws since 1986.

·The issue of
disciplinary versus interdisciplinary graduate school programs is being
examined.

Medical School

·Dr. Steve Wartman,
has accepted the position of Dean of the Medical School.He will fill the position at the end of March.

·Discussions
are underway concerning monies that have been allocated to the university
for the development and renovation of teaching space.

·New clinic
space has been acquired with the addition of the Diagnostic Clinic Building.
The efficiency of MSRDP, which is a major funding source is an ongoing
discussion.

·The first class
to experience the new "integrated basic science curriculum"
is the current second year class.Informal observations suggest that things are going well.Positive feedback has been received from clinical
preceptors indicating that this class seems more advanced in clinical
skills compared to students in previous years.Additional information should surface concerning the impact of
the curricular changes as these students rotate through the third-year
clerkships.

School of Allied Health

·Dr. Dennis
Blessing, from UTMB, has accepted the position of Chair of the Physicians
Assistant Program.He is expected
on campus in May.

·The Chair position
for Physical Therapy and the search for the position remain open.

Dental School

·Renovations
of the building and the dental equipment are in progress. Dental units
that were original to the school are being upgraded.

·The dental
school is preparing to implement the electronic curriculum in August
2000 for incoming freshmen. Texts will be issued (bought) by students
in CD-ROM format, along with class outlines and manuals on CD-ROM.

School of Nursing

·Dr. Carol Benzer
has accepted the position of Associate Dean for Students. She will begin
the position in July 2000.

·Dr. Brenda
Jackson accepted and is currently serving in the position of Interim
Associate Dean for the Undergraduate Program.

·Currently there
are openings for the positions of Chair, Department of Chronic Nursing
Care and Chair, Department of Family Nursing Care.A search committee has been convened for the Associate Dean for
Information Technology and Curriculum Resources position.

·Off campus
sites are being developed for LVN and RN distance learning.Sites in Alpine and Seguin are being planned.

·Texas A&M
in Kingsville has expanded to include a site at Palo Alto College in
San Antonio. Palo Alto is a member of the Alamo Community College District.
The nursing major is currently in the negotiation stages with The UTHSCSA
School of Nursing.

James Schneider
(UTSA)A&M said they would
offer programs no one else didas for example, Agricultural Science.
But no one wanted it, so they are now bringing in programs that are
competing with us at lower prices. This is a declining campus that has
been in trouble for a long time. Enrollment has been declining, funding
is suboptimal. Are they going to move the main campus?

Sykes: Anyone else have their curriculum on CD rom? It is working out well
for the dental branchis portable and the students like it. This
is something to watch.

Staats: I think this is a national movement for dental students.

UT Southwestern Medical CenterCheryl Silver

1.
UT Southwestern has announced its campus expansion plan for the year
2012, which includes construction of a new center for ambulatory care,
expansion of combination clinical/research facilities on our North Campus,
the development of a West Campus component, construction of a new underground
parking garage for faculty, and a housing development for students and
visiting fellows.Additionally,
negotiations are under way for the purchase of a hospital facility,
currently under private ownership, which would become a part of the
planned West Campus.

2.
Because of the feeling of vulnerability expressed by some faculty and
for the purpose of utilizing 21st century technology, UT
Southwestern has begun consideration of a SmartCard plan that assigns
a card to each faculty member, which would serve as an ID card, security
card for the buildings and offices, and parking card for entrance into
parking facilities.

3.
A female professor and chair of the Physical Therapy Department has
received the first endowed professorship created in the UT Southwestern
Allied Health Sciences School.

4.
Following a round of holiday parties, the president of UT Southwestern
has withdrawn approval for alcohol to be served at any campus events
where students are in attendance, or at any off-campus events involving
students which are supported by university funds.

5.
Dean of graduate school has stepped down from the position due to health
related problems. A search committee has been formed.

University of Texas Houston
Health Science CenterJames Turley

·
Faculty Satisfaction Survey: The InterFaculty Council has identified
salaries, teaching and faculty reviews as the top priority concerns.
We will ask the Executive Council to work with faculty to address these
areas. The IFC believes that focus on the areas of teaching and faculty
reviews are vital to achieving the UT-HHSC goal of becoming the model
health sciences center of the 21st century.

·
SACS was here!We had an excellent
exit interviewloved our compliance report, and the fact that the
self-study was online. They were also very impressed with our students.

·
We were reaccredited for 10 years (compliance) with 2 substantial recommendations,
the most important of which was to demonstrate financial stability for
the medical school

·
We also had a commendationthe University leadership was acknowledged
for their open dialogue on differing perspectives.

·
We need to respond to them by August 15.

·
Medical School:Have lost $9M
in practice plan for FY99. They have received $10M from surplus for
FY 2000 (is already gone in the first 6 months)now is a $20M projection.
Leaves reserves of only $16M.

·
There will be reductions in the central business office (approx 45-50
people)

·
? Administrative reductions

·
Performance incentives reduced

·
Faculty have already been given notice of non-reappointment

·
Collect 40% of gross chargestranslates into approximately 22 cents/$1.

·
Overhead is about 24%--benchmarked at about 8-10%

·
Are drafting a business plan for the next 6 months, next year, and next
2 years.

·
Memorial Hermann Hospital is required to take 6% indigent carecurrently
do 12%. (is approx $70M) We do 90% of this and receive no reimbursement.
Are looking into this as a source of revenue.

·
Allied Health:Coordinating
Board to do site visit about doctoral program in informatics

University of Texas Health Science Center at TylerJerry
McLarty

·On January 13, the two faculty chairs met with President,
Dr. Garvey, concerning asking for tenure at the Health Center.It was agreed that Dr. Garvey would try to
get the issue on the November Regents meeting. However, after attending
the February regents meeting, Dr. Garvey said he thought it would be
better to wait until the institution gets degree granting capabilities
and then ask for tenure.

·In a joint clinical faculty meeting March 9, the faculty
voted unanimously (except for one abstention) in favor of not waiting
for degree granting before asking for tenure.

·A subcommittee was formed to investigate the possibility
of permanently merging the clinical and research faculty assemblies
into one organization.

·The President has issued another 5% cut across all budgets
(2nd time in a row). Last year some administrators had raises
of 20-25%.

Craven: Your HOOP
does not have a list of criteria on how to get tenureyou do have
criteria on how to get promoted. Be careful that the achievement of
tenure does not get out of reach for a large part of the clinical faculty.

McLarty: That
is a concern, but I dont think the bar could be any higher for
both groups than it is now.

Craven: Administration
has the perception that they lose control when faculty get tenure since
you now have a greater level of independence andprotection.
Did the Chairmen vote on this?

McLarty: No.

University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center - David Farquhar

Lifetime Tenure vs. Term Appointments

·After nearly
one year of deliberation, the President of the Cancer Center, Dr. John
Mendelsohn, has ruled on the issue of tenure versus 7-year renewable
term appointments for our faculty. He has decided that we should stay
with our current term appointment system. In reaching his decision,
he solicited the input of five standing committees, namely, the Executive
Committee of the Medical Staff, the Executive Committee of the Science
Faculty, the Executive Committee of the Faculty Senate, the Promotion
and Tenure Joint Working Group, and the Physicians Referral Service
Executive Committee. Four of the committees recommended that we retain
the current term appointment system. One, the Faculty Senate Executive
Committee, recommended a switch to tenure. The vote of the 70 Senators
who participated in the Senate debate was 37 for lifetime tenure and
30 for retaining the current 7-year term appointment system; 3 members
abstained. Dr. Mendelsohn explained his decision as follows:

·We are a university with a unique research
and clinical mission;we are
not a medical school;

·Our unusual collaborative culture and
our outstanding success have developed under the present term appointment
system;

·Our current system is attractive to outstanding
clinician researchers; they have a higher probability of achieving term
appointments here than tenure at any other U.T. medical component or
any other academic medical center in the country;

·Academic freedom is preserved under either
system if applied properly, with appropriate safeguards and conflict
resolution mechanisms;

Faculty Conflict Resolution
Policy

·
A new faculty conflict resolution policy has been developed at the Cancer
Center. It consists of 3 major components. The first is an Ombudsman
office. The Ombudsman has wide ranging authority to determine the facts
of a case, and reports directly to the President. The second component
is mediation; for this the Cancer Center has retained the services of
a distinguished retired Texas Appeals Court Justice. The third component
is a Faculty Appeals Panel; this will consist of three individuals selected
by random number generation from a pool of 45 faculty members who are
elected from their respective departments. This Conflict Resolution
Policy is pending approval in the UT Office of General Counsel.

Craven:
This replaces the current grievance policy. It is an attempt to resolve
problems and conflicts internally without lawyers. If it is an EOC or
criminal act, this does not take away the right to pursue legal action.

Farquhar:
Administration and faculty worked on this jointlyeveryone is a
part of itthere is no adversarial relationship.

Upward Evaluation

·
Upward Evaluation was conducted earlier this year, and involved faculty
administrators with the title of department chair or division head (where
a division is an organizational unit consisting of a number of departments).
The overall faculty response was 67% compared with 56% last year. The
faculty was provided no feed back on the results of Upward Evaluation.
However, immediately after completion of the process, one division head
resigned. A second division head resigned two days ago. The relationship
of Upward Evaluation to the resignations was not explained.

·
All faculty administrators subject to Upward Evaluation are required
to present plans to Senior Administration on how they propose to remedy
the perceived deficiencies in their administrative performance. Upward
Evaluation will be conducted again next year and will be extended to
all senior administrators whose duties impact on the ability of faculty
to perform their duties including VPs and Executive VPs
(the Chief Academic Officer, the Chief Medical Officer, and the Chief
Operating Officer).

Hilley:
Is the ombudsman position a full time position?

Farquhar:
The faculty want it to be a 50% appointment. The president wants it
to be about 25%. The person will receive a supplement reflecting the
time he/she spends in the job. Anyone can nominate themselves for this,
but they must have training in mediation/conflict resolution.

Hilley:
All campuses presently have an
ombudsman office of students, right?

General consensus was no.

University of Texas El PasoRalph Luigori

·
There are two search committees formed or being formed to fill the Deans
positions in the College of Business and the College of Health Sciences.
The College of Business search is more advanced as Dr. Hoy is stepping
down on August 31. The Dean of Health Sciences, Patricia Castiglia,
will search until December 31 or even later if needed. The search committees
were filled with the Faculty Senate nominating 6 possible members for
each committee.

·The Communications
Department saga continues. The leadership of that group of faculty seems
to be undetermined at this time. A special Ad Hoc Committee that was
set up early last fall to investigate the ramifications of the then
proposed changes reported to the Faculty Senate in February. In a comprehensive
report of the actions involving the Communications Department a major
finding of the committee was that there has not been any good
faith communication with the faculty about decisions which affect their
career, the future of students in the program, and/or the impact of
radical program changes in the University at large.The report of the committee was accepted by the Faculty Senate
unanimously. Further, the Senate voted unanimously to have the President
of the Senate create an Ad Hoc Committee to participate in the resolution
of the situation in order to preserve and enhance the role of the faculty
in the decision-making process according to sound academic principles.
Finally the Senate invited the Provost to address that body concerning
the subject, which he did at the regular meeting in March. There are
criteria from the Coordinating Board andthe Board of Regents for disbanding a department. Administration
says the department is not being disbanded, just relocated into a Communications
Center.Administration has not
followed the procedure because they say the purpose is to disperse people,
not to get rid of them. Faculty are concerned about the arbitrary manner
in which things appear to have been handled. For example, the press
was notified of events before the faculty were.

·The administration
has retained Professor Pat Witherspoon of UT to mediate the situation
and make recommendations concerning the administrative changes to be
implemented.

·
The attack by our state Senator against some of the faculty of the College
of Business which resulted from a report by a group of high school students
on the lending practices of the El Paso Banking Community appears to
have been quietly dropped. Although no public communication has been
published in which the Senator has dropped his charges imputing any
study by a faculty group investigating the charges raised by the student
group, it appears that he has quietly backed off from infringing on
the academic freedom of the faculty.

·
We
are in the process of doing upward evaluation every 2nd year.
Our policy requires feedback at each administration level, but we only
have about a 50% response on this. Clinical and tenure track faculty
were pretty much segregated.

·We had a booklet
on the Standards of Conduct Guide. Regarding the section
related to investigations and press media relationsif there was
an investigation the proper procedure was to let the superior know.
It has since been revised and is currently focused on the mediaif
you are approached by the press the proper procedure is to talk to your
supervisor first and not speak to the press. Subsequent to discussions,
a letter was sent from the President via U. T. System saying that you
can speak to the press.

·We still have
no faculty on the compliance committee.

Dunnington: We dont have a book,
we have a memo with a printed standards of conduct that reflects that
the 75th legislature requires that all faculty be notified
of the standards re the use of state resources, 556.0 Termination of
Employment, and Compensation Prohibition. I am supposed to sign it and
return. It appears that different campuses are receiving different information.

Nelsen: Do you still have to do compliance
training? All of the modules are up. Every faculty member should have
received a code of conduct manual. The web site has 12 different modules
addressing a wide range of topicsall employees have to take the
web based training. Government agencies can investigate at any time.
You cant talk to the media directly about the investigation or
criminal charges of the investigations.

Turley: Our IFC said this whole issue is DOA and we have not heard from them again.

Payne:One fold-over flyer came with our paychecks saying you need to
be in compliance. Lee Smith, our Compliance Officer, and faculty representatives
met to come up with a document that describes issues related to classified
staff and faculty. It doesnt say anything about a code of conduct
or standards. It also does not need to be signed. We have not heard
anything about training.

Dunnington: Every faculty governance should
have representation on the compliance committee.

Turley: UT-H HSC has 2 faculty representatives
as requested by the IFC.

Dunnington: There really is quite a wide
range of participation from nothing to everything in the various components.
There are so many inconsistencies that it is difficult to track, and
yet there doesnt seem to be any conflict of interest.

Nelsen: The Vice Chancellor said no signatures
are required, although the forms/letters have all come out with signature
pages.

We
discussed the student web page where anyone can have input anonymously
at UT-Dallas. The faculty believe this is a problem. We thought it was
a problem of liabilitythere is a federal statute that immunizes
the University with respect to something published on the web. Individuals
who feel harmed can sue the person(s) who put the information out on
the web if the person(s) can be identified.We have begun to look at this as a use of resourcessince
funding for this site will need to come out of someones budget.
The President can refuse to use resources in this wayas faculty
we couldnt stop the students to do this as they have the right
to do this by the Office of General Counsel, as well as the law. The
money really is nominal but the President could justify the funding/lack
of funding as a resource allocation issue.

Schneider (UTSA): The issue is having a
web site with the University name on it. There is a distinct possibility
that it can end up with a skewed representation that can mislead students
and others.

Nelsen: There are no restrictions as to
what goes on the web site. This is protected by a soft cushion
due to the Universitysposition.
If the University takes someones web site off, they have
lost the protection of the soft cushionnow everything is at risk.
The soft cushion is a protection by the federal statute that says you
are not liable for the information posted.

Craven: What if something is downright illegal that is downloaded onto the web.

Nelsen:The University cant block it or tamper with it in any way.
If it does, it loses that protection for the whole campus on all web
sites. The ruling originated years back out of cases related to pornography.

Farquhar: You can be held personally liable
for information. The comments were traced through the web addressit
was discoverable.

Page: The whole spectrum of web pages for
faculty, students, etc are in one basketthe University would be
liable for anything offensive here since they edit peoples pages.
The other is a free speech areawhich is what the students want.
You can say anything here and no one is allowed to take this down. The
University cannot touch anything on this web page, no matter what. If
the source could be traced, then there could be a suit. The students
are ensuring there can be no trace through the use of kiosks and anonymous
log ins.

Bartlett: How does a web page get declared
to be a free speech area?

Page: BPM 53 is under revision, but does
give the general guidelines for everything related to the state with
respect to web pages/electronic medium. Web Master is never mentioned.
The document is not all that specific as to who can do what or put what
on the web.

Turley: This is a moving targetit
will take decades to litigate because of the difference in what is public
and private, how far down is this protected, etc. This is not an area
that will be solved easily. For example, every faculty member could
be a serverthere is no separate certification for this.

Page: If you have a PC in your office with
the root password, you can access the network in ways that can compromise
security. Everyone in that position should be certified, but we arent
doing that. When you get a root password you need to sign that you will
behave.Bottom line for the student is to send them
somewhere else, lets not spend state monies on thisfaculty
should not be involved.

Joel:reminded the FAC about upcoming elections.
The incoming chair-elect must be from a health science component.

COMMITTEEREPORTS

Academic Affairs
Committee

Guests: Catherine Parsoneault

Members: M. Hilley, C. Gaulden, C.
Lackey, R. Ligouri

Vice President for Administration and Legal Affairs
Patti Ohlendorf of UT Austin was invited to address the committee on
the status of past efforts on status of women in the system.She has been invited and intends to attend our June meeting.

Initial discussion of the TEATHE proposal/initiative.The committee is working on understanding the initiative.Early on we discussed the possibility of a response to the TEATHE
idea.The committee remained
unsure as to whether to attempt a response to the initiative and, possibly,
raise the plan to a high level or to wait and see how things go.We will do research on the proposal and discuss
it again at the June meeting.The
committee may then begin formulating specific plans to deal with the
initiative if it appears that it will influence the next legislative
session.Impacts include a conversion from the current
American system to the British system of higher education.

Discussion of the nature of organization among community
colleges and its impact on the lack of ability of the university sector
to be consistent in its voice.

Dr.
Ray Garcia, is chair of the CC organizationis a very effective
voice. Are organized in their approach to the legislature, raise monies
to fund their organization. The university sector has nothing similar.

FIELDS OF STUDY

Public comment period of 30 to 60 days after the April
meeting for the Business field of study curriculum.Early childhood has been redesigned for EC-4
and 4-8.This will also be up
again in April.We need to get
faculty at all Texas universities to be aware of the comment period
and its value to us.

General business committee is finished
with the Fields of Study curricula. Are attempting to get copies of
the drafts the Coordinating Board is looking at. Music is moving slowly.
The CB will look at them in April, likely will approve, will post it
for 60 days for comment (we should be notified when it begins) and then
it can be passed as law.

Nelsen: I thought
they were coming to us first, and then go to public comment.

FEASIBILITY

The feasibility study report is due to the legislature
by September 2000 (per SB 1261).The
committee has not yet been appointed for this study.Community colleges are interested in the outcome.Looks like this will happen pretty soon now.Committee may be appointed as early as next week.

Gaulden:Recommendation: Send a name(s) from the FAC for representation on
the feasibility study committee.

Page: I nominate
Corbett Gaulden.

Hilley: My committee
(music) is still working. I think sending forward Corbetts name
would help to ensure a strong committee. Corbetts Field of Study
is completed.

Friday, March 24

Committee
members received copies of the Minnesota and Arizona transfer reports
for study.Members will discuss
the studies in the June meeting.

Committee
members received draft copies of the Field of Study curricula that the
board will be considering at its April meeting.

MOTION:

The
UT FAC wishes to ask the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs to instruct
each academic component to put into place mechanisms that capture all
transfer problems and to document the nature and resolution of each
instance of transfer dispute.Further,
we wish to ask the Vice Chancellor that all such cases be reported to
his office.The purpose of this activity will be to enable
the UT System to respond to any and all concerns that are related to
transfer.

under
the section called Community Colleges: Mission.We believe the very large scope described therein makes it very
difficult for the community colleges to insure adequately academic course
coverage.First, the criteria
for faculty selection are not the same for community colleges as for
universities.Second, courses
for university preparation should be academically equivalentto their counterparts at the universities.We believe that in many cases, university-bound
students are in classes with students who are not in university bound
programs, as is required by accrediting bodies.

Therefore,

1)We wish to
recommend that the chancellors office make it a high priority
to stress that faculty at community colleges who teach courses that
are intended for university transfer (particularly general education
core) meet the same criteria as faculty teaching the same courses at
universities.

2)We wish to
recommend that the chancellors office make it a high priority
to stress that courses that are taught under the heading of the general
education core should be specifically identified as appropriate for
university transfer.

Further, we wish to ask the chancellor to convey our
concerns and recommendations to the Texas Higher Education Coordinating
Board and any and all other appropriate parties.

By invitation:

Summary

This
committee covers the health affairs of all campuses, and all the affairs
of the health campuses.

Dr.
Mullins met with the committee on Thursday to discuss current problems
affecting the health campuses.

1.Formula funding
by the state to the Health Center campuses was noted. This will in theory
equalize the appropriations by the state according to students served.This is an attempt to minimize the special projects
funding by the state. Handouts of the latest revision of the plan was
distributed by Dr. Mullins.

2.As more of
health campus budget comes from the practice of medicine, billing by
the state via the MSRDP came under scrutiny.Discussion on:

a.The history
of centralization ofMSRDP in
the 1980s;

b.Problems with
the PATH audit in the 1990s, leading to requirements for significant
documentation by faculty in patient care, minimizing the differences
in day-to-day responsibility between private practice and academic practice.

c.Reduction of
Medicare dollars for indigent care

d.Stark differences
in the reimbursement for Graduate medical Education between training
centers in the Northeast and Texas, based on 1984 base year data.

e.Current collecting
ability of various campuses, which vary.Reporting of billing in general is not up to private standards.

b.Difficulties
in finding time for traditional teaching while competing for funded
patients.

c.Utilization
of select private physicians for training purposes.

d.Training was
noted to, on average, take 20% more time for patient care that simply
providing the care without educational obligation.

e.A goal of average
faculty salary at 80% of AAMC levels is present; currently apparently
we are about 40-50% across the board.

4.On Friday,
detailed discussion with new Head of the Employee Group Insurance (EGI),
Daniel Stuart, was held. Manager of Insurance Benefits Kathleen Pantalion,
was present also.

Mr. Stewartgave an overview of the role of EGI in the UT system: a System-Level
middle person, which tries to maximize the purchasing power
of the state and employee contributions to health, life, and disability
insurance, as well as selecting a third-party agency to administer the
UT cafeteria plans such as FLEX accounts.EGI works with the products developed by commercial carriers
who wish to bid for UT business (not all do!), and health products developed
by UT component institutions in Galveston, Houston,San Antonio, and Dallas.

The staff for EGI has risen from 6-8 two years
ago, to 18-20 now, based on consultation and audit reports.

Cost of premiums for health care will probably
increase an average of 20% this year. For employees electing basic
coverage without child, spouse, or family (57% of all UT system employees),
no cost increase is possible according to state law. That means that
the cost increase for those opting for family coverage, or opting for
more than basic plans, will be considerably more that a 20% raise in
premiums.

He noted dissatisfaction with Cigna, and related
a frank discussion with them three weeks ago regarding their UT service.
Increased communication with individual employees as well as component
HR input is a priority within the limits of current staffing.

Anecdotal feedback regarding 1-800 numbers,
cards, etc was given.It was
suggested that large-scale anecdotal and other feedback, useful to the
EGI in negotiations with the carriers and discussions with the legislature,
be expedited. Several models were discussed. A web- and email-based
schema, with organization of the data during input, with a large text
area to describe anecdotes, may be practical from all viewpoints. Dr.
Dunnington emphasized his negative experience in the past insuring that
EGI was aware of feedback from individual component institutions regarding
insurance issues.

Disability insurance for medical professionals
has been dropped June 1 by the carrier; UT led by MD Anderson are scrambling
for new coverage.

The meeting ended by recommending to President
Dunnington that Mr. Stewart be invited to the general SYS-FAC meeting
in June to update the SYSFAC on current issues, problems, and trends.

Resolutions: None

Discussion:
Joel: changes he was making and the grasp he has on whats going
on has moved us forward greatly already. Sounds very knowledgeable about
the problems and willing to work with us. Wants frank input on issues
from each campus.

Shelley: did
you ask about the domestic partners coverage?

Joel: it is
against the lawOGC was asked for a ruling. I asked for a copy
of what OGC said and examine it.

Cheryl: the
disability has been dropped for who?

Turley: the
disability in the straight faculty line is still there. This is the
additional liability that comes through the practice plans is what has
been dropped. This was on top of what UT System had for all employees.
The business with the practice plan has been terminated.

GovernanceCommittee

The Governance
Committee discussed three major issues:Faculty Contract letters,Upward
Evaluation of Administrators, and indemnification and liability for
faculty.

Last year
we passed resolutions with regards to the first two issues, but in the
Committees opinion more specific wording was necessary to resolve
the controversy surrounding the contract letters and the upward evaluation
reporting process.Hence, we are offering the following resolutions:

I.Faculty letters of appointment should be
distributed no later than the first day of classes and shouldcontain the following information:

(See
pg 28 of letters of appt resolution of previous minutes) 1-3

1)the specific
section of Regents Rules under which the faculty member is appointed;

2)the exact dates
of appointment;

3)the statement
a revised memorandum will be sent if there is a change in your
status during the indicated budget period;

7)if applicable,
the phrase the obligation of the University for payment of all
or any portions of the compensation that is payable from contracts,
grants, and non-state sources is dependent upon receipt of those funds.

8)contain the
phrase by accepting this document I am not waiving my right to
grieve contractual matters

Discussion: Could the appointment
letters not come out in a more timely manner?

Vote:passes unanimously.Dunnington
will distribute it to the Chancellor for distribution to Mullins and
Sharpe.

II.Upward evaluation by relevant faculty of all
administrative officers below the level of the chief administrative
officer is periodically required by Regents Rules and is intended to
be an important component of the individual administrators employee
evaluation.The effectiveness of the upward evaluation
process is, in part, proportional to the percentage of faculty members
who are involved in such evaluations.Faculty need to know that the upward evaluation process is taken
seriously.

To ensure that the upward evaluation process improves
administrative leadership and management skills we recommend that:

Following completion of the upward
review, senior administrative officers should discuss in an open forum
the results of the evaluation with the affected faculty.The details of any programs for improvement recommended for affected
administrators (if any) should also be presented at that time.Consequently, the following questions should
be addressed:

1.What counseling
or improvement programs are in place for faculty administrators who
perform poorly on Upward Evaluation?

4.What are the
consequences for faculty administrators with consecutive unfavorable
Upward Evaluations?

Discussion:

Bartlett: Do you think administrators
might turn this around and use this on faculty (ie follow-up for improvement,
etc.). We do already have performance evaluations.

Nelsen: We do already have something in place for this.

Kellner: PTR does have this as a model already.

Ross Sherman: The concept of open forum needs to be defined. I would rather have a
private closed evaluation with my administrator. Are we treating administrators
differently than faculty? The evaluation is between the employee and
supervisor.

Page: Any written report is subject to open records.

Travis: Instead of mandating an open forum, the resolution should state that
the administrator should provide feedback or discuss the evaluation
in an open forumthis way the discussion is the goal and not necessarily
how it is done.

McLarty: If the evaluation
is only in the form of a written report, it seems to be more innocuous.
The discussion is important.

Buckman: If you have the forum then the faculty can ask the administrator questions
and get answers directly.

Payne. If you delete open forum, there still can be a discussion,
and privacy is retained.

Amendment:

Following completion of the upward review,
senior administrative officers should discuss the results of the evaluation
with the constituent faculty. The details of any programs for improvement
recommended for affected administrators (if any) should also be presented
at that time. Consequently, the following questions should be addressed:

Vote:
one against. Vote passes.

We also discussed issues regarding indemnification
of faculty who are performing their jobs and the liability
of such individuals. Mr. Leo Barnes from OGC came to the committee and
presented his opinions on such matters and the actual laws. The long
and short of it is that he asked us to write a formal request to OGC
asking for a web page that will address the issues and compile the relevant
laws.

OGCs client, he said, is the University and not
individual faculty members. If a faculty member is sued, the Attorney
Generals office is (in accordance with law) supposed to defend
the defendant. State employees (us) do have qualified immunity if the
duties they perform are the reasons for the suit. All such duties must
have been done in good faith and must be in accordance with what laws,
etc., a reasonable person would normally know.

The State laws state there is a cap of $100,000 for
liability. The state could possibly come up with other money, but it
is unclear how or when. We will know more once the web page is put on
the web.

Dunnington
will write a letter to Mr. Farabee requesting information be placed
on the web. He will also have copies sent to Chancellor Cunningham and
Vice Chancellors Mullins and Sharpe.

Faculty
Quality Committee

1.The committee has completed its work on the
faculty exit survey (attached) which we recommend to be delivered to
all faculty leaving employment by a U. T. System component. We recommend
that the U.T. System administration direct all Presidents of component
institutions to begin administering this survey as soon as is practical.

Nelsen: The Coordinating Board already
sends out a small exit survey.

Dunnington: Do we have any data from that?
How would that be analyzed or reported? Will it be done as a committee?

Bartlett: I dont know how many faculty
are exposed to the exit survey. If its not too much, the analysis
could be done as part of the regular Faculty Quality committee work
once/twice a year.

Dunnington: Any idea what type of faculty
is affectedwould this also include the lecturers and instructors
too?

Bartlett: Yes, because they are included
in Regents Rules.

Travis: Then there could be a large number
to look at.

Bartlett: Senior lecturers are important.
Restricting our review of the exit surveys to include only those full-time
faculty who leave may be helpful.

Travis: Where to the FAC where this would
be sent?

Bartlett: Ed Sharpes office.

Vote:Send it out, the committee will compile the info.Unanimously passed.

2.We have reviewed the U.T. Austin policy on
nondiscrimination on the basis of sexual orientation (attached) and
recommend that other institutions add this or a similar statement to
their HOPs, student handbooks and/or other appropriate documents. The
U.T. System policy should be consulted; it is available at www.utsystem.edu/systempolicies/sex disc.htm

Recommendation
to all FAC members to examine the sex discrimination policy at U. T.
Austin and on their campusesand discuss in their individual senates
to increase awareness of the issue.

Vote: Passes unanimously.

3.Having discussed Ms. Maxwells highly
informative presentation of faculty rights to privacy, we urge that
all FAC members make it clear to their fellow faculty that there is
no reasonable expectation of privacy for any and all materials in their
offices and on their computers and sent and received by them via e-mail
and the Web. They may also wish to develop a privacy policy like those
at U.T. Arlington and M.D. Anderson (attached) though it should be clear
that such policies concern due process as opposed to any true protection
of privacy.

Dunnington: Section 2A should read President
or designee.

Nelsen: I would like this to stay with
the President. This is likely to end up in the Compliance
officers lap if designee gets in.

Bartlett: Each campus could do what works
for them.

Dunnington: Remember that the U.S. mail
is not confidential once it gets into your building.

Moore: The institutional policy says it
is. According to Georgia Harper, the mail would be confidential if marked
as so. UT Arlington just passed this institutional policy. It is posted
on the web page.

Recommendation: take to respective campus
for their information.

4.We discussed the RFP for a second Faculty Satisfaction
Survey with Art Martinez of the U. T. System. He was very helpful and
highly encouraging and will be working with us on an RFP over the next
few weeks. We hope to begin the application process by the end of April
and are shooting for a final completion date for the final report of
September 1, 2001.

5.We are actively discussing the new code-of-conduct
and compliance training procedures being implemented in different ways
at the U. T. System components. We will monitor the fate of U. T. Austins
proposed policy which has separate procedures for faculty as opposed
to staff. If the U.T. Austin plan is approved by the U. T. System, we
will recommend it or something similar as a model policy for other components.

Dunnington:A reminder to think about the upcoming elections. For those
of you who are interested in a position please email a biosketch so
that Verklan can email it out to the FAC members.

Dunnington will inquire if the executive
committee will visit the Board of Regents in May.